MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Pivotal Role of Vascularization in Tissue Engineering

2013· review· en· W2144885509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Biomedical Engineering · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsTissue engineeringRegenerative medicineBiomedical engineeringComputer scienceBiologyMedicineStem cellCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vascularization is one of the great challenges that tissue engineering faces in order to achieve sizeable tissue and organ substitutes that contain living cells. There are instances, such as skin replacement, in which a tissue-engineered substitute does not absolutely need a preexisting vascularization. However, tissue or organ substitutes in which any dimension, such as thickness, exceeds 400 μm need to be vascularized to ensure cellular survival. Consistent with the wide spectrum of approaches to tissue engineering itself, which vary from acellular synthetic biomaterials to purely biological living constructs, approaches to tissue-engineered vascularization cover numerous techniques. Those techniques range from micropatterns engineered in biomaterials to microvascular networks created by endothelial cells. In this review, we strive to provide a critical overview of the elements that must be considered in the pursuit of this goal and the major approaches that are investigated in hopes of achieving it.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it